New Panoramas for critique

I ve uploaded a couple of new panoramas, all feedbacks/critiques to improve the panoramas or/and the site itself are welcome. www.360mh.com/ Thanks, Mahmood

Message 1 of 14
, Sep 1, 2007

0 Attachment

I've uploaded a couple of new panoramas, all feedbacks/critiques to
improve the panoramas or/and the site itself are welcome.

www.360mh.com/

Thanks,
Mahmood

Carel

Hi Mahmood, I think you files will be much smaller if you restrict sharpening to areas that will really benefit from it. Viewing the panos from a pc without

Message 2 of 14
, Sep 1, 2007

0 Attachment

Hi Mahmood,

I think you files will be much smaller if you restrict sharpening to areas
that will really benefit from it. Viewing the panos from a pc without video
card, I see a lot of "shimmering" (which is usually caused by sharpening) on
the water and ground. Your file size will be greatly reduced if you leave
those areas unsharpened. I also always leave the sky unsharpened.

Thanks Carel for your advise.
It actually makes sense not to use sharpening on water and sky, a very
good point that can both lower the shimmering when moving on some
computers and reduce the file size. I have to put it into practice to
see how much extra time it would take to exclude sky/water and how
much it reduces the size.
The shimmering problem is something that I don't see at all on my
computer when using DevalVR and just a little when using QT, only when
I move the panorama but I can imagine that it can be a bigger problem
on some systems.
I will definitely use your advise in some of (if not all of) my future
works.

Thanks,
Mahmood

Mahmood Hamidi

Thak you Jann for your response, see my comments embedded in your original message. ... Thank you. ... That one is tone mapped all right, I have not learnt

Message 5 of 14
, Sep 1, 2007

0 Attachment

Thak you Jann for your response, see my comments embedded in your
original message.

--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "jann_lipka" <jann@...> wrote:
>
> I think your Panoramas look very good ,
> and you have a great handling of nadir shots in most of the panos.

Thank you.

> Skinnarviksberget panorama looks slightly "flat" and there is a quite a
> halo around the plane ( Tone mapping ? ) .

That one is tone mapped all right, I have not learnt this hdr business
very well yet, evertime I use it, my images end up very flat and too
soft. I must be doing something wrong there...

> In "shopping rush " there is some power lines across the street
> and those looks slightly jaggy and pixelated.

I'm not sure what you mean by power lines, so no comments there

> I'm not bothered so much about shimmering in water , because it stops
> with the movement , but maybe sharpening is giving also steps on the
power lines .
>
>
> Otherwise very good job with such a contrasty scene as in NK pano.
>

Thank you again,
Mahmood

Martin Hrdlicka

... Hi Mahmood, this is fun that you have very similar name of your domain as mine and both take up interest in virtual panoramas. My domain www.mh360.com (

Hi Mahmood,
this is fun that you have very similar name of your domain as mine and
both take up interest in virtual panoramas.
My domain www.mh360.com ( old pages) consists of first characters of
my name too.
I wish you good luck for pano-shooting.
Martin Hrdlicka :-))
www.mh360.com
www.panorama360.cz
www.virtualczech.cz

Mahmood Hamidi

... Indeed Martin, Actually, I checked mh360 first but you had been there first, then I just swapt the the initials and 360. I may start using an alternative

>
> --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Mahmood Hamidi"
> <mahmood_hamidi@> wrote:
> >
> > I've uploaded a couple of new panoramas, all feedbacks/critiques to
> > improve the panoramas or/and the site itself are welcome.
> >
> > www.360mh.com/
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mahmood
> >
> Hi Mahmood,
> this is fun that you have very similar name of your domain as mine and
> both take up interest in virtual panoramas.
> My domain www.mh360.com ( old pages) consists of first characters of
> my name too.
> I wish you good luck for pano-shooting.
> Martin Hrdlicka :-))
> www.mh360.com
> www.panorama360.cz
> www.virtualczech.cz
>

Indeed Martin,
Actually, I checked mh360 first but you had been there first, then I
just swapt the the initials and 360. I may start using an alternative
domain name soon though.

Regards,
MH

Mahmood Hamidi

Hi again Carel, I have uploaded a new pano in the Nacka Strand serie, its name is Nacka Strand (04) . In this one I have followed your advise, no sharpening

Message 8 of 14
, Sep 1, 2007

0 Attachment

Hi again Carel,

I have uploaded a new pano in the "Nacka Strand" serie, its name is
"Nacka Strand (04)".
In this one I have followed your advise, no sharpening on sky or water.
How does the shimmering look on your computer with this panorama moving?

--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Carel <cs@...> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Mahmood,
>
> I think you files will be much smaller if you restrict sharpening to
areas
> that will really benefit from it. Viewing the panos from a pc
without video
> card, I see a lot of "shimmering" (which is usually caused by
sharpening) on
> the water and ground. Your file size will be greatly reduced if you
leave
> those areas unsharpened. I also always leave the sky unsharpened.
>
> Regards,
>
> Carel Struycken
>
> --
> View this message in context:http://www.nabble.com/New-Panoramas-for-critique-tf4364550.html#a12441913
> Sent from the PanoToolsNG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>

erik leeman

Hi Mahmood Hamidi, Deval Nacka Strand has less aliasing shimmers on my screen than the QTVR one, and in both it is most visible in the boats and some of the

Message 9 of 14
, Sep 1, 2007

0 Attachment

Hi Mahmood Hamidi,

Deval Nacka Strand has less aliasing 'shimmers' on my screen than the
QTVR one, and in both it is most visible in the boats and some of the
trees. Unless a viewer is capable of (hardware supported) anti-
aliasing it will always be there if there is any sharply defined
detail in a moving image. Make murky, low-res VR's and it's gone, and
so will be al detail and image quality. Let's hope viewing technology
will catch up with high quality content soon.
May I suggest an adjustment of your FOV settings?
With VR's like these I think it would be better to use these:
max FOV = 80
min FOV = 45
initial FOV = 60
Zooming out as far as is possible now serves absolutely no purpose
(in my mind at least) and zooming in all the way only reveals ugly
compression artefacts, not detail. The initial FOV of 60 makes the
image a little more 'quiet' regarding aliasing noise without limiting
the view too much.
Other than that I think the image is a bit 'greyish' overall. I
certainly don't like oversaturated images, but this looks a bit too
flat to me. Do you use a calibrated monitor? If you don't maybe you
should consider buying the necessary gear, it really can make a huge
difference!

Regards,

erik leeman

(www.erikleeman.com)

jann_lipka

Mahmood, Sorry I was not clear about power cables Here comes a screen shot ( QTVR versions ) - comparison of NK Pano of yours with a similar pano crop of

Hi Erik, Thank you for your response. I suspect that you have looke on Nacka Strand (4) , but might be wrong. There are 3 others in that serie which I suspect

Message 11 of 14
, Sep 2, 2007

0 Attachment

Hi Erik,

Thank you for your response.
I suspect that you have looke on "Nacka Strand (4)", but might be
wrong. There are 3 others in that serie which I suspect show more
shimmerings in water that (4) as no sharpening was applied to the
water in that one.
Also, regarding the saturation, I agree that this last nr 4 was the
greyest of all and therefore increased the it a little bit, how does
it look like now?
Or do you think that the others also suffer of the same flatness?

Mahmood

--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "erik leeman" <erik.leeman@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Mahmood Hamidi,
>
> Deval Nacka Strand has less aliasing 'shimmers' on my screen than the
> QTVR one, and in both it is most visible in the boats and some of the
> trees. Unless a viewer is capable of (hardware supported) anti-
> aliasing it will always be there if there is any sharply defined
> detail in a moving image. Make murky, low-res VR's and it's gone, and
> so will be al detail and image quality. Let's hope viewing technology
> will catch up with high quality content soon.
> May I suggest an adjustment of your FOV settings?
> With VR's like these I think it would be better to use these:
> max FOV = 80
> min FOV = 45
> initial FOV = 60
> Zooming out as far as is possible now serves absolutely no purpose
> (in my mind at least) and zooming in all the way only reveals ugly
> compression artefacts, not detail. The initial FOV of 60 makes the
> image a little more 'quiet' regarding aliasing noise without limiting
> the view too much.
> Other than that I think the image is a bit 'greyish' overall. I
> certainly don't like oversaturated images, but this looks a bit too
> flat to me. Do you use a calibrated monitor? If you don't maybe you
> should consider buying the necessary gear, it really can make a huge
> difference!
>
> Regards,
>
> erik leeman
>
> (www.erikleeman.com)
>

erik leeman

Hi Mahmood, Please be very careful with increasing saturation of a finished pano, especially if it is only 8 bits in colourdepth! You ll get ugly posterization

Message 12 of 14
, Sep 2, 2007

0 Attachment

Hi Mahmood,

Please be very careful with increasing saturation of a finished pano,
especially if it is only 8 bits in colourdepth! You'll get ugly
posterization (did I spell that correctly?) in clear skies and other
relatively featureless areas if you overdo it just the slightest bit!
It is much better to make corrected RAW-conversions (I really hope you
work with RAW and 16-bit TIFFs) and restitch using the script you
already have.
I'll have a look at the others and PM you, OK?

Regards,

erik leeman

(www.erikleeman.com)

Mahmood Hamidi

... Well, I corrected the saturation on my almost finished pano. It was 16-bit tiff, extracted from RAW though, all the way to the stiched pano. Mahmood

Message 13 of 14
, Sep 2, 2007

0 Attachment

--- "erik leeman" <erik.leeman@...> wrote:

> It is much better to make corrected RAW-conversions (I really hope you
> work with RAW and 16-bit TIFFs) and restitch using the script you
> already have.

Well, I corrected the saturation on my "almost finished" pano.
It was 16-bit tiff, extracted from RAW though, all the way to the
stiched pano.

Mahmood

Carel

... Yes, it works as intended. The shimmering is not my main concern. it is just an indicator. File size SHOULD be a big concern, because broadband speed

Yes, it works as intended. The shimmering is not my main concern. it is just
an indicator. File size SHOULD be a big concern, because broadband speed
varies considerably from country to country and broadband speed is much
slower between continents. I therefore usually also compress the tiles
separately, compressing much more for the nadir unless there is something of
interest to see there. Usually my compression is: Pano2QTvr quality setting:
60 for Zenith (watch for banding in blue sky), 70 for four around and 40 for
nadir. I also sharpen on a separate layer and then mask out all the
unimportant parts.